A phase II randomized trial of cobimetinib plus chemotherapy, with or without atezolizumab, as first-line treatment for patients with locally advanced or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (COLET): primary analysis
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
•Cobimetinib plus paclitaxel trended toward a numerical increase in progression-free survival and objective response rate.•The triplet combination of atezolizumab, cobimetinib, and taxane did not appear to increase objective response rate.•The triplet combination showed a trend toward improved objective response rate in patients with programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1)-positive disease.•These results demonstrate the potential activity of combination immunotherapy for this difficult-to-treat patient subgroup. BackgroundResistance to standard chemotherapy in metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC) is associated with upregulation of the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway. Cobimetinib, an MAPK/extracellular signal-regulated kinase (MEK) inhibitor, may increase sensitivity to taxanes and programmed death-ligand 1 inhibitors. COLET is a three-cohort phase II study evaluating first-line cobimetinib plus chemotherapy, with or without atezolizumab, in patients with locally advanced or mTNBC.Patients and methodsPatients were ≥18 years with locally advanced or mTNBC. Following a safety run-in, patients in cohort I were randomized 1:1 to cobimetinib (60 mg, D3-D23 of each 28-day cycle) or placebo, plus paclitaxel (80 mg/m2, D1, 8, and 15). Additional patients were randomized (1:1) to cohort II or III to receive cobimetinib plus atezolizumab (840 mg, D1 and D15) and either paclitaxel (cohort II) or nab-paclitaxel [cohort III (100 mg/m2, D1, D8, and D15)]. Primary endpoints were investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) (cohort I) and confirmed objective response rate (ORR) (cohorts II/III). Safety and tolerability were also assessed.ResultsIn the expansion stages, median PFS was 5.5 months for cobimetinib/paclitaxel versus 3.8 months for placebo/paclitaxel in cohort I [hazard ratio 0.73; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.43-1.24; P = 0.25]. In cohort I, ORR was 38.3% (95% CI 24.40-52.20) for cobimetinib/paclitaxel and 20.9% (95% CI 8.77-33.09) for placebo/paclitaxel; ORRs in cohorts II and III were 34.4% (95% CI 18.57-53.19) and 29.0% (95% CI 14.22-48.04), respectively. Diarrhea was the most common grade ≥3 adverse events across all cohorts.ConclusionsCobimetinib added to paclitaxel did not lead to a statistically significant increase in PFS or ORR, although a nonsignificant trend toward a numerical increase was observed. Cobimetinib plus atezolizumab and a taxane did not appear to increase ORR. This demonstrates the potential activity of a combinatorial MEK inhibitor, chemotherapy, and immunotherapy in this difficult-to-treat population. Resistance to standard chemotherapy in metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC) is associated with upregulation of the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway. Cobimetinib, an MAPK/extracellular signal-regulated kinase (MEK) inhibitor, may increase sensitivity to taxanes and programmed death-ligand 1 inhibitors. COLET is a three-cohort phase II study evaluating first-line cobimetinib plus chemotherapy, with or without atezolizumab, in patients with locally advanced or mTNBC. Patients were ≥18 years with locally advanced or mTNBC. Following a safety run-in, patients in cohort I were randomized 1:1 to cobimetinib (60 mg, D3-D23 of each 28-day cycle) or placebo, plus paclitaxel (80 mg/m2, D1, 8, and 15). Additional patients were randomized (1:1) to cohort II or III to receive cobimetinib plus atezolizumab (840 mg, D1 and D15) and either paclitaxel (cohort II) or nab-paclitaxel [cohort III (100 mg/m2, D1, D8, and D15)]. Primary endpoints were investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) (cohort I) and confirmed objective response rate (ORR) (cohorts II/III). Safety and tolerability were also assessed. In the expansion stages, median PFS was 5.5 months for cobimetinib/paclitaxel versus 3.8 months for placebo/paclitaxel in cohort I [hazard ratio 0.73; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.43-1.24; P = 0.25]. In cohort I, ORR was 38.3% (95% CI 24.40-52.20) for cobimetinib/paclitaxel and 20.9% (95% CI 8.77-33.09) for placebo/paclitaxel; ORRs in cohorts II and III were 34.4% (95% CI 18.57-53.19) and 29.0% (95% CI 14.22-48.04), respectively. Diarrhea was the most common grade ≥3 adverse events across all cohorts. Cobimetinib added to paclitaxel did not lead to a statistically significant increase in PFS or ORR, although a nonsignificant trend toward a numerical increase was observed. Cobimetinib plus atezolizumab and a taxane did not appear to increase ORR. This demonstrates the potential activity of a combinatorial MEK inhibitor, chemotherapy, and immunotherapy in this difficult-to-treat population.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».